Видео

" Even the greatest amongst them are still too human Said Zarathrustra"

I love this coverage of Rousseau, but his ideas seem kind of nuts to me. It is hard to see how people could believe this stuff unless these people actually just wanted to burn everything down and murder everyone.

42:04 ugh! But what if it was the other goddamn way around!? What if we initially came to an awareness of ourselves only by coming to the awareness of others first! Where the self comes to knowledge of itself through "negation" of the other (other is viewed as "thesis," self is viewed as "antithesis") by associating the self with the "negative space" of the other, and that "self-first" (self as "thesis") identity only became possible through the development of _the abstraction_ (eg, straight lines) to the point where they became untethered from nature and more dependent on mind (eg, the whole point of the construction of a monarchical project is to convince the peasants that the rule of the king proceeds from facts about nature rather than facts about minds, which are in fact their only true source of power! It's quite frustrating!)

Hahaha and what Augustus Nero and King Solomon went to Heaven Hahahaha do me favor!! He was awake to too much manipulation and destruction toward this world. Fredrick was so awake, too many people were brainwashed to think he had actually lost his mind when really he was so awake to the narcissism, the psychopathy and manipulative bullshit of others, people rather believe a lie, that look in the mirror and see the real truth, it was just all too much in the end for Fredrick. It's was a like an avalanche of truth coming at him from every direction, that just finally devolved him till his untimely death. End of video. Move on. But hold you want a lesson here. Oh ok....the human species are absolute cunts and everyone lived happily ever after. Hahahahahahshs

Imagine training two LLMs - one on Nietzsche's writings and one on Jung's, and then letting them talk to each other. Maybe a summer vacation project is forming 🤔

Nice work grateful for you

I guess if you want to have more potential for self-realization and authenticity then Nietzsche is the philosophy to study, albeit nuanced it is about the self and self morality based upon observations and the human experience which is grossly lacking in religious dogma. For me, believing in a god is madness.

Thank you very much for your great work.

By envy isn't he referring to ressentiment .. which of course means rather more than just envy?

Damn dude you just got yourself a subscription..you did an excellent job of breaking all this down. I was able to follow you all the way threw with out losing any focus and or interest. Keep sharing/making content 🤙🏼

I don't really know what being a free spirit can amount to if there is no free will. I'll stick with Hegel, he's easier to follow. I did once have the pleasure of meeting Carl Jung's granddaughter, yes truly, who told me Peterson get's everything wrong about Jung. I wonder how it is possible to be repeatedly wrong about thinkers that you admire?

Basically Yahweh elohim entertaining himself and we are the characters in a universal theater I'm laughing 😂 because he always say hide yourself in yourself all by yourself 😇

I'd be pleased if you could make a future episode on Jonathan Bowden, if he is of interest to you.

24:35

01:02:00

Best say of Jung's archetypes. Well done 😊

I haven't read the seminar about Nietzche but taking into account Jung's diagnosis of Joyce's daughter, Lucia, I wonder if Jung considered something similar thinking about Nietzche: “Doctor Jung, have you noticed that my daughter seems to be submerged in the same waters as me?” to which he answered: “Yes, but where you swim, she drowns.”

Kneecha went looney 🤪 as do all ppl with no God in their life. Thats the consensus judgement about all these irrelevant old fossils from the perspective of this, the post modern age.

A thought I had on a dog walk- is it possible that Diogenes the Cynic is the patron philosopher of comedians? Isn’t the role of the comic to be the joker who exposes our universal hypocrisy? Could the famous event in the town square, carrying the lighted lamp in daylight, searching in vain for the honest- himself included- be one of the greatest pranks in human history? Is this why a painting of him preparing his lamp, in his cistern, surrounded by onlooking dogs, is the wallpaper on my goddamn iPhone? Am I a hypocrite for putting that image on a goddamn iPhone screen? Should I finally end this self-indulgent comment?

Yall shoulda seen that graveyard on the hill in van buren (next to the big gun) two years ago when a tornado hit it! Big ass trees all over the place with sideways headstones sticking out of em and visable coffins.

I was the 69th thumbs up Skull Yeah 😎

Nah I prefer to not follow the religion of nihilism unless you want heaps of mental issues and distress

god ofKEEG!!... "...for nothing is more tassssty than a little lamb."... o, immortalKEEG... how sexual... sensuous... subversive is the low presto sonorous tone of your wicked voice!... lololo

You’re great to listen to sir.

do you have the script you used for this video still? it's very interesting but trying to follow the video is throwing me off for some reason, simply reading it would be easier. however the youtube transcript isn't all that great. auto generated captions get confused.

You are great. Impaccable tone.

And yet God has survived modernity. It's modernity that will not survive God. ✝

1:25:00 Great summary of the types!

One thing to remember about the Lord Acton quote is the context where he said it. Lord Acton was a British Roman Catholic who was devout enough in his beliefs that he stuck with Catholicism, despite this limiting his social mobility due to the anti-Catholic laws at the time. The quote specifically comes from his participation in the contemporary dispute over whether or not the Pope was infallible and was contained in a letter written to a Bishop. Lord Acton was strongly on the side which argued that the Pope was not infallible and he was one of the people who funded this side of the dispute. However, that side ultimately lost the dispute, hence giving us the doctrine today of papal infallibility (with a hilarious number of caged caveats that make the whole thing pointless, but anyways...). Hence his critique of absolute power is understood as pointing out the flaws of a man elevating himself to unchallengeable divine authority, something we've seen go wrong time and time again, whether prophets or dictators claim such authority. The quote is also regarded as having originated from the British Prime Minister William Pitt, who had the softer take that absolute power tends to corrupt.

You have to remember that Jung says his dream predicted the coming bloodbath in Europe that may be his own need to be prophetic like Nietzsche. Then there is his Philemon character as if he has to have his own Zarathustra etc. He And Freud owed so much to Nietzsche and their egos competed with that.

04:50 - incorrect, it's not that the will is completely free from the material and uncaused, it's that you don't understand the cause

We have free will and it's easily demonstrable through deduction. Everyone is confused about what they're talking about.

Can someone tell me the details about the painting illustrated in this video ? striving to want it as Wallpaper

27:00 instantly thought of Vladimir Kramnik and “The Process” (tm) 💀

40:06

What's the intro music?

Thank you. 🙂

The one thing that I find hard to parse with Nietzsche's philosophy is the fact that Christianity apparently has been one of the most prolific patrons of art throughout history. If Christianity is the way a certain set of life-denying philosophical ideas manifest in the world, in other words that Christianity only has "No!" to say to things, then how is it for example that churches are some of the most beautiful and awe-inspiring things humanity ever created? And the way the monks dress like wizards, that they use incense during ceremonies, that they commission paintings, sculptures and churches house the most extravagant musical instruments (organs) ever made. Even just that people wear crosses which are quite beautiful even if you don't believe in Christianity. Etc etc. Aren't they saying "Yes!" to beauty? All the beauty is just a seduction to get you to conform to the metaphysical dogma? I mean maybe, but it's very cynical and I don't see why you would have to conclude that to be the main driving factor. Of course there must be all sorts of psychological intricacies as to why christians focus so much on art. I find it unlikely that so much of the art could be so inspired but also be motivated mainly by "No"-saying ulterior motives. Did Bach, famously devout, make 1128 pieces not out of inspiration but out of a recruitment scheme? I think if you told the architects of the Cologne Cathedral that they weren't inspired they would get offended. In the first place, art is only really well done if you focus on the art itself and not what you will get out of making it. Now maybe the artists are pure enough, but the top clergy who commission it are scheming? But well I find it hard to believe these top catholics or orthodoxes would be consistently psycopathic throughout many centuries and didn't really care about beauty despite spending vast resources on it. Alternatively you could spin it like "They're actually discontent with reality so they create transcendental art as a kind of "active-denial"". Again, how would you be sure of that though? Didn't Nietzsche make the point that "Those greeks were superficial -- out of profundity!"? If the superficial reality is all that matters, aren't the catholics and orthodoxes doing pretty good on that front? And if they're doing it out of transcendental reasons, doesn't that imply there's superficial utility in believing in the transcendental? That might be a case where the will to truth is harmful to life then. Maybe there is a Yes-saying spirit in the way Christianity has manifested? Which to parse it with Nietzsche's critique of the origins of christianity being among the fearful and resentful slave classes of Rome, maybe that means christians aren't that christian anymore if they have turned it into such an aesthetic way of life? Looking at the basic christian recipe, you're supposed to be humble, have a wife and kids and remain honest and faithful and be an example of generousness in your community, and in general to not engage in vulgar pleasures (which scientifically we know for example porn or drugs ruins your dopaminergic system's ability to value the more subtle joys of life)... At least compared with the modern "do whatever you want as long as you don't hurt anyone"-attitude, it seems like a sensible and mature way of life, purely from an aesthetic viewpoint. Of course, other cultures that aren't christian have had that recipe too. I guess the one aesthetic critique that I find convincing is that taking part in christian ceremonies can be rather long-winded and dull, and you can get a sense that nothing new or exciting is possible. In other words there's something morbid about it, like a dreary old man sitting on a park bench waiting to die. So in that sense it's bad. But they do a lot of glorious shit too.

I also greatly enjoy the expansion beyond Nietzsche but appreciate your desire to keep the podcast centered on him. I found these two episodes on Jung very valuable and essential to better understand Nietzsche. Thank you!

Lol, this title. 😊 It's excellent work -- thanks for sharing. Your writing is high quality. I read many of these books in the past - but I have never read the early Nietzsche manuscripts. You offer a really excellent commentary for Americans, too. I especially enjoyed your discussion with Daniel Tutt -- so that's solid, too. I will recommend that you highly encourage listeners to go back to primary texts - you want to encourage your listeners to look to themselves instead of you for knowledge. Otherwise people tend toward reactivity - particularly on these platforms.

what books by deleuze would you recommend?

What a great ending to the season! Many thanks for all your hard work. You have truly enriched my life these past couple months, and have inspired in me a great philosophy; a love of wisdom. One thing that did stand out to me as curious was the statement given 50:32 "Having a combatant, or an enemy is actually of great benefit. It is the test of their ideas, their contrast, their contest which creates a productive relationship. This is where everything good and worthwhile comes from." - Could you help clarify how this differs so with the Hegelian dialectic? It is a similar (seeming) contradiction I find in the writings of Gilles Deleuze, who also sets himself at odds with the Hegelian dialectic (though he does explain how his being at odds is not dialectic) but this is yet something I fail to grasp. Is it simply the dialectic as a means to an end which Nietzsche disagrees with?

Long story short Nietzsche is largely misunderstood bc he was mentally ill.

I’ve done everything in Skyrim almost and now I’m also trying to collect organize and read the books. Hats off to you

If you’re looking to explain the Greek Mindset…. Just call them Meds. and leave it at that.

He went mad because he thought he was god

To quote J.P buebian "absolute power does not corrupt absoltely I've known employes that abuse any little power they are given." Its the kind of person ypu are yes you will make errors and it is good to start small to get a hang of power but what is power without wisdom?

Amazing exposition, thank you

Jesus man I love your content but drink your water away from the fucking mic

Does anyone know what name or nickname "essential salts" goes by? I'm in love with his work and it's annoying calling him "the essential salts guy" to my friends